Legal Opinion

Gilbraith v. Hixson

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 19, 1987No. 86-734PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShannon, J.

It is well-settled in Ohio, under the doctrine of res judicata,1 that “[a] final judgment or decree rendered upon the merits, without fraud or collusion, by a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of rights, questions and facts in issue as to the parties and their privies, and is a complete bar to any subsequent action on the same claim or cause of action between the parties or those in privity with them.” Norwood v. McDonald (1943), 142 Ohio St. 299, 27 O.O. 240, 52 N.E. 2d 67, paragraph one of the syllabus, approved and followed in Whitehead v. Gen. Tel. Co. (1969), 20 Ohio St. 2d…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Baldwin v. Iowa State Traveling Men's Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Hart Steel Co. v. Railroad Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
  4. Norwood v. McDonaldOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Goodson v. McDonough Power Equipment, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. In Re: Daniel Fordu, Debtor. Harold A. Corzin v. Julie A. ForduCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
  2. Ohio Pyro, Inc. v. Ohio Department of CommerceOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Matter of Paternity of JRWWyoming Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Corzin v. Fordu (In Re Fordu)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 1997
  5. Phillips v. RayburnOhio Court of Appeals · 1996

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API